1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Woe is me!

Discussion in 'Leica Camera Chat' started by Grierson, Jun 14, 2018.

  1. Grierson

    Grierson Well-Known Member

    Just found out that my M9 has a corroded sensor just ten months after Leica have ‘pulled’ the free replacement policy. Descision time. Spend £950, yes that’s right £950, for a replacement or not?
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2018
  2. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    Is your particular camera less than 6 years old and did you buy it from a trader? If so you might have a Sale of Goods Act claim On the basis Leica have admitted an inherent fault. Bear in mind I'm no lawyer.
     
    Roger Hicks likes this.
  3. Grierson

    Grierson Well-Known Member

    Thanks for that Andrew. Unfortunately I bought the camera from ffordes c. 5 years ago and in addition I have no way of checking it’s age. (I’ve not seen published any serial number/age listings for cameras after the M6)
     
  4. graham_mouat

    graham_mouat Well-Known Member

    Sorry to hear that. I thought mine was OK but this time last year when the end of free sensor replacement was announced had it checked at Leica Store Manchester and they confirmed it was beginning to corrode. I had a new sensor at no cost, but I'm not sure what I would have done in your position. Leica will still replace sensors without charge on cameras less than 5 years old, but I presume yours is older than that. If so then I guess your choices will be use it as is, sell it as is (but that seems to hit the value pretty hard), pay for the replacement (which I understand includes a very comprehensive service of the camera and it should come back working like a new camera) or make use of the trade up offer that Leica announced when the free sensor replacement ended.

    More info here:

    https://en.leica-camera.com/World-o...ica-M9-M9-P-M-Monochrom-and-M-E-camera-models
     
  5. Roger Hicks

    Roger Hicks Well-Known Member

    Well, the sensor on mine was replaced "free", though there was a substantial charge, 180€ as far as I recall, which I never did figure out. Even at 950€ I'd account a rebuilt, guaranteed M9 as a better bet than any of the alternatives, but it's a very personal choice.

    FWIW I found that the corrosion was invisible with fast lenses at wide apertures: only at f/4 and smaller did it start to show up, worse and worse.

    Cheers,

    R.
     
  6. Grierson

    Grierson Well-Known Member

    Thanks for comments. I do not want to sell the camera and had I not just decided to check with a shot of the sky at f16 I would never have known of the issue looking at my day to day images. However I assume it will get worse so I think I will have to bite the bullet and find the money.
     
  7. Roger Hicks

    Roger Hicks Well-Known Member

    Or shoot wide open for another year -- it's what I did (same sky problem). Gives you time to save up!

    Cheers,

    R.
     
  8. Grierson

    Grierson Well-Known Member

    Thank you Roger!
     
  9. David Traynor

    David Traynor Member

    Being in Australia I don't know much about U.K. laws, but as our laws are similar in many ways, it may be an idea to spend a few pounds and consult a solicitor who is expert in consumer/product liability law?

    You may have a case based on the facts - it is a recent model
    - it is a known problem
    - there has been a recently expired "fault correction" campaign.

    Shouldn't cost too much for an initial opinion on your case.

    Regards, David
     
  10. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    IIRC (which I think I do, having used the search facility...), the OP bought the camera second hand 5 years ago. No idea how old the actual camera is, but it could be anything from 5-9 years old - as such, I suspect (as a non-lawyer) there's not much chance of progressing down the legal action route - even if you won, you would be very unlikely to get the whole cost awarded, given the age of the camera.
     
  11. David Traynor

    David Traynor Member

    Thanks Nick,
    Not quite sure about the "IIRC" reference, but as to being a lawyer, neither am I. Nevertheless I spent many years with a manufacturer, handling customer "feedback" and abiding by Australian consumer law.
    My suggestion is for the OP to get a legal opinion from someone who may have a more expert local knowledge of the legalities available to him than I.
     
  12. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Sorry, "If I Remember (or Recall) Correctly".

    And to put my experience in perspective, I was UK Customer Relations Manager for Peugeot for several years, so I do have similar experience to yours except dealing with UK law, which is why I don't think he should waste any money on lawyers in this case.
     
    Roger Hicks likes this.
  13. David Traynor

    David Traynor Member

    Thanks Nick,

    "Snap"

    Mine was in an identical position for BMW Australia.

    I bow to your superior local knowledge.

    Kind Regards,

    David
     
  14. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    It's not that it's impossible to win, but that at the age of the camera, the award would be likely to not be that great anyway - the court would take into account the 5 years use of the camera, and that it wasn't new in the first place - in my non-legal humble opinion, of course - so I suspect any consultation might be more expensive than the potential winnings.
     
  15. David Traynor

    David Traynor Member

    I suspect Australian consumer law may be a little more favoured toward the consumer.

    Kind Regards,

    David
     
  16. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Possibly so. Ours is fairly well weighted in favour of the consumer, but almost all of it applies through the contract of sale between the seller and the consumer, and relatively little between the manufacturer and the consumer. Warranty is an exception, but as this camera was second-hand, and is well out of warranty anyway, there's little chance of proving a contract between manufacturer and consumer, and if this was a private sale, there is absolutely no case to make IMHO. If it was bought from a company, then it might be worth contacting them to get it fixed, though.
     
  17. Chester AP

    Chester AP Well-Known Member

    I recall that AP printed a letter 2 or 3 years ago from a Leica owner who had a problem with the screen on the back of the camera body:
    it was faulty not long out of guarantee and Leica were 'unhelpful'. When a company with the (alleged) customer support standards of Leica refuses to quietly deal with things like your problem, or the one in the AP letter, obviously they are not worried about any bad publicity because so many customers will continue to buy the brand anyway. In both cases, if Leica did not want to repair or replace the camera body because of its age or because none were available, why not find a decent used one from one of their dealers and give it to you as a replacement?

    At least try to get your problem aired in a letter published in AP so that many more potential Leica customers can be informed of the company's attitude to your problem. Name and shame, and think carefully before investing so money in that brand in future.

    I suspect that AP devotes too much space to idolising various new latest-model cameras, and not enough to reporting 'long term' feedback from readers who have purchased and used the stuff. And noted problems like yours so that the manufacturer can be invited to respond (and be treated with contempt if they provide a patronising response). But this would not be good for advertsing revenue...
     
  18. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    Why on earth should they ?
     
    Roger Hicks likes this.
  19. Roger Hicks

    Roger Hicks Well-Known Member

    Dear Pete,

    Quite. This is a camera 5-10 years old, bought second hand. Generally, Leica are pretty good to their users, especially if the camera/lens was bought new and is not long out of guarantee, but it is crazy to pretend that anything, long out of guarantee and with no service history, bought used, should be repaired forever at the manufacturer's expense. It's a bit like complaining about lack of synchromesh on early Aston Martin gearboxes, or bimetallic corrosion on Ferrari Superleggera bodywork.

    Cheers,

    R.
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2018
    Benchista likes this.
  20. nimbus

    nimbus Well-Known Member

    It seems to be the way German companies act now, look at the number of complaints about their cars. I've been on the receiving end of that, simple answer, I bought from another manufacturer from a different country the next time and have not purchased any more German cars!
     

Share This Page